Quite contradictory views have been
expressed in Western literature on the attitude of Buddhism toward the
concept of God and gods. From a study of the discourses of the Buddha
preserved in the Pali Canon, it will be seen that the idea of a //personal
diety//, a creator god conceived to be eternal and omnipotent, is
incompatible with the Buddha's teachings. On the other hand, conceptions
of an //impersonal godhead// of any description, such as world-soul, etc.,
are excluded by the Buddha's teachings on Anatta, non-self or
unsubstantiality.

In Buddhist literature, the belief in a creator god
(//issara-nimmana-vada//) is frequently mentioned and rejected, along with
other causes wrongly adduced to explain the origin of the world; as, for
instance, world-soul, time, nature, etc. God-belief, however, is placed in
the same category as those morally destructive wrong views which deny the
kammic results of action, assume a fortuitous origin of man and nature, or
teach absolute determinism. These views are said to be altogether
pernicious, having definite bad results due to their effect on ethical
conduct.

Theism, however, is regarded as a kind of kamma-teaching in so far as
it upholds the moral efficacy of actions. Hence a theist who leads a moral
life may, like anyone else doing so, expect a favourable rebirth. He may
possibly even be reborn in a heavenly world that resembles his own
conception of it, though it will not be of eternal duration as he may have
expected. If, however, fanaticism induces him to persecute those who do
not share his beliefs, this will have grave consequences for his future
destiny. For fanatical attitudes, intolerance, and violence against others
create unwholesome kamma leading to moral degeneration and to an unhappy
rebirth.

Although belief in God does not exclude a favourable rebirth, it is a
variety of eternalism, a false affirmation of permanence rooted in the
craving for existence, and as such an obstacle to final deliverance.

Among the fetters (//samyojana//) that bind to existence, theism is
particularly subject to those of personality-belief, attachment to rites
and rituals, and desire for fine-material existence or for a "heaven of
the sense sphere," as the case may be.

As an attempt at explaining the universe, its origin, and man's
situation in his world, the God-idea was found entirely unconvincing by
the Buddhist thinkers of old. Through the centuries, Buddhist philosophers
have formulated detailed arguments refuting the doctrine of a creator god.
It should be of interest to compare these with the ways in which Western
philosophers have refuted the theological proofs of the existence of God.

But for an earnest believer, the God-idea is more than a mere device
for explaining external facts like the origin of the world. For him it is
an object of faith that can bestow a strong feeling of certainty, not only
as to God's existence "somewhere out there," but as to God's consoling
presence and closeness to himself. This feeling of certainty requires
close scrutiny. Such scrutiny will reveal that in most cases the God-idea
is only the devotee's projection of his ideal - generally a noble one -
and of his fervent wish and deeply felt need to believe. These projections
are largely conditioned by external influences, such as childhood
impressions, education, tradition and social environment. Charged with a
strong emotional emphasis, brought to life by man's powerful capacity for
image-formation, visualization and the creation of myth, they then come to
be identified with the images and concepts of whatever religion the
devotee follows. In the case of many of the most sincere believers, a
searching analysis would show that their "God-experience" has no more
specific content than this.

Yet the range and significance of God-belief and God-experience are not
fully exhausted by the preceding remarks. The lives and writings of the
mystics of all great religions bear witness to religious experiences of
great intensity, in which considerable changes are effected in the quality
of consciousness. Profound absorption in prayer or meditation can bring
about a deepening and widening, a brightening and intensifying of
consciousness, accompanied by a transporting feeling of rapture and bliss.
The contrast between these states and normal conscious awareness is so
great that the mystic believes his experience to be manifestations of the
divine; and given the contrast, this assumption is quite understandable.
Mystical experiences are also characterised by a marked reduction or
temporary exclusion of the multiplicity of sense-perceptions and restless
thoughts, and this relative unification of mind is then interpreted as a
union or communion with the One God. All these deeply moving impressions
and the first spontaneous interpretations the mystic subsequently
identifies with his particular theology. It is interesting to note,
however, that the attempts of most great Western mystics to relate their
mystical experiences to the official dogmas of their respective churches
often resulted in teachings which were often looked upon askance by the
orthodox, if not considered downright heretical.

The psychological facts underlying those religious experiences are
accepted by the Buddhist and well-known to him; but he carefully
distinguishes the experiences themselves from the theological
interpretations imposed upon them. After rising from deep meditative
absorption (//jhana//), the Buddhist meditator is advised to view the
physical and mental factors constituting his experience in the light of
the three characteristics of all conditioned existence: impermanency,
liability to suffering, and absence of an abiding ego or eternal
substance. This is done primarily in order to utilize the meditative
purity and strength of consciousness for the highest purpose: liberating
insight. But this procedure also has a very important side-effect which
concerns us here: the meditator will not be overwhelmed by any
uncontrolled emotions and thoughts evoked by his singular experience, and
will thus be able to avoid interpretations of that experience not
warranted by the facts.

Hence a Buddhist meditator, while benefiting by the refinement of
consciousness he has achieved, will be able to see these meditative
experiences for what they are; and he will further know that they are
without any abiding substance that could be attributed to a deity
manifesting itself to the mind. Therefore, the Buddhist's conclusion must
be that the highest mystic states do not provide evidence for the
existence of a personal God or an impersonal godhead.

Buddhism has sometimes been called an atheistic teaching, either in an
approving sense by freethinkers and rationalists, or in a derogatory sense
by people of theistic persuasion. Only in one way can Buddhism be
described as atheistic, namely, in so far as it denies the existence of an
eternal, omnipotent God or godhead who is the creator and ordainer of the
world. The word "atheism," however, like the word "godless," frequently
carries a number of disparaging overtones or implications, which in no way
apply to the Buddha's teaching.

Those who use the word "atheism" often associate it with a
materialistic doctrine that knows nothing higher than this world of the
senses and the slight happiness it can bestow. Buddhism is nothing of that
sort. In this respect it agrees with the teachings of other religions,
that true lasting happiness cannot be found in this world; nor, the Buddha
adds, can it be found on any higher plane of existence, conceived as a
heavenly or divine world, since all planes of existence are impermanent
and thus incapable of giving lasting bliss. The spiritual values advocated
by Buddhism are directed, not towards a new life in some higher world, but
towards a state utterly transcending the world, namely, Nibbana. In making
this statement, however, we must point out that Buddhist spiritual calues
do not draw an absolute separation between the beyond and the here and
now. They have firm roots in the world itself for they aim at the highest
realization in this present existence. Along with such spiritual
aspirations, Buddhism encourages earnest endeavor to make this world a
better place to live in.

The materialistic philosophy of annihilationism (//ucchedavada//) is
emphatically rejected by the Buddha as a false doctrine. The doctrine of
kamma is sufficient to prove that Buddhism does not teach annihilation
after death. It accepts survival, not of an eternal soul, but of a mental
process subject to renewed becoming; thus it teaches rebirth without
transmigration. Again, the Buddha's teaching is not a nihilism that gives
suffering humanity no better hope than a final cold nothingness. On the
contrary, it is a teaching of salvation (//niyyanika-dhamma//) or
deliverance (//vimutti//) which attributes to man the faculty to realize
by his own efforts the highest goal, Nibbana, the ultimate cessation of
suffering and the final eradication of greed, hatred and delusion. Nibbana
is far from being the blank zero of annihilation; yet it also cannot be
identified with any form of God-idea, as it is neither the origin nor the
immanent ground or essence of the world.

Buddhism is not an enemy of religion as atheism is believed to be.
Buddhism, indeed, is the enemy of none. A Buddhist will recognize and
appreciate whatever ethical, spiritual and cultural values have been
created by God-belief in its long and chequered history. We cannot,
however, close our eyes to the fact that the God-concept has served too
often as a cloak for man's will to power, and the reckless and cruel use
of that power, thus adding considerably to the ample measure of misery in
this world supposed to be an all-loving God's creation. For centuries free
thought, free research and the expression of dissident views were
obstructed and stifled in the name of service to God. And alas, these and
other negative consequences are not yet entirely things of the past.

The word "atheism" also carries the innuendo of an attitude
countenancing moral laxity, or a belief that man-made ethics, having no
divine sanction, rest on shaky foundations. For Buddhism, however, the
basic moral law is inherent in life itself. It is a special case of the
law of cause and effect, needing neither a divine law-giver nor depending
upon the fluctuating human conceptions of socially conditioned minor
moralities and conventions. For an increasing section of humanity, the
belief in God is breaking down rapidly, as well as the accustomed
motivations for moral conduct. This shows the risk of basing moral
postulates on divine commandments, when their alleged source rapidly loses
credence and authority. There is a need for an autonomous foundation for
ethics, one that has deeper roots than a social contract and is capable of
protecting the security of the individual and of human institutions.
Buddhism offers such a foundation for ethics.

Buddhism does not deny that there are in the universe planes of
existence and levels of consciousness which in some ways may be superior
to our terrestrial world and to average human consciousness. To deny this
would indeed be provincial in this age of space travel. Bertrand Russell
rightly says: "It is improbable that the universe contains nothing better
than ourselves."

Yet, according to Buddhist teachings, such higher planes of existence,
like our familiar world, are subject to the law of impermanence and
change. The inhabitants of such worlds may well be, in different degrees,
more powerful than human beings, happier and longer-lived. Whether we call
those superior beings gods, deities, devas or angels is of little
importance, since it is improbable that they call themselves by any of
those names. They are inhabitants of this universe, fellow-wanderers in
this round of existence; and though more powerful, they need not be wiser
than man. Further, it need not be denied that such worlds and such beings
may have their lord and ruler. In all probability they do. But like any
human ruler, a divine ruler too might be inclined to misjudge his own
status and power, until a greater one comes along and points out to him
his error, as our texts report of the Buddha.

These, however, are largely matters beyond the range and concern of
average human experience. They have been mentioned here chiefly for the
purpose of defining the Buddhist position, and not to serve as a topic of
speculation and argument. Such involvement can only divert attention and
effort from what ought to be our principal object: the overcoming of
greed, hatred and delusion where they are found in the here nad now.

An ancient verse ascribed to the Buddha in the "Questions of King
Milinda" says:

Not far from here do you need to look!
Highest existence - what can it avail?
Here in this present aggregate,
In your own body overcome the world!